Material Phenomenology and Language (or, Pathos and Language)

2019 ◽  
pp. 193-214
2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Ashworth

The realm of intentionality is definitive of phenomenology as a reflective methodology. Yet it is precisely the focus on the intentional given that has been condemned recently. Speculative realism (e.g. Meillassoux, 2008/2006) argues that phenomenology is unsatisfactory since the reduction to the intentional realm excludes the ‘external’, i.e. reality independent of consciousness. This criticism allows me to clarify the nature of intentionality. Material phenomenology finds, in contrast, that the intentional realm excludes the ‘inner’ (‘auto-affective life’—Henry, 1973/1963). This criticism allows me to discuss the way in which ipseity enters as an element of experience. Intentionality, viewed psychologically, is rightly the distinct arena of phenomenological psychology. However, there is no doubting the difficulty of maintaining a research focus precisely on the realm of intentionality; there are aporias of the reduction. I discuss some of the difficulties.


2010 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 382-385
Author(s):  
Adam Wells

Author(s):  
John David Barrientos

When we go back-by means of the epoché of the world, following Michel Henry-towards the originary “how” of all manifestation (videor), we stumble once and again upon the phenomenological situation of the body. The body is, then that originary hinge by means of which I manifest world in a continuous resistance. It will be, as well, within my own body where I am always aware of oneself, according to my own affection (self-affection, not previously constituted). Thus, the material condition of the body will be that of my internal body, or subjective body-as Henry initially read in Maine de Biran-or that of my flesh, as Henry himself would later say. Bearing all this in mind, the intermediate situation of one’s own affection, of this body of mine, with regard to the world and the videor, turns out to be an appropriate medium to attempt a preliminary study of the problematic situation of the internal time of affection. For this purpose, we shall revise the analysis offered by Michel Henry in Material Phenomenology and in Incarnation, indicating possible aporias, as well as alternatives to these last ones.Cuando, siguiendo a Michel Henry, retrocedemos en una epoché hacia el “cómo” originario de toda manifestación (videor), tropezamos una y otra vez con la situación fenomenológica del cuerpo. El cuerpo es, pues, esta bisagra originaria a través de la cual yo manifiesto el mundo en continua resistencia. También será dentro del propio cuerpo donde uno será siempre autoconsciente, de acuerdo con la propia afección (autoafección, no constituida previamente). Por eso, la condición material del cuerpo será la de mi cuerpo interior o cuerpo subjetivo, de acuerdo con la lectura inicial que Henry hace de Maine de Biran; o de mi carne, como dirá el mismo Henry más tarde. Teniendo en cuenta todo ello, la situación intermedia, situación de la afección propia y la de mi cuerpo en relación con el mundo y el videor, resulta ser un medio apropiado para emprender un estudio preliminar de la problemática situación del tiempo interno de la afección. Para ello, revisaremos el análisis que Michel Henry ofrece en Material Phenomenology y en Incarnation, indicando las posibles aporías, así como posibles alternativas.


2019 ◽  
Vol 49 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-206
Author(s):  
Joseph Rivera

Abstract The purpose of this paper is threefold: (1) To show the basic contours of transcendental subjectivity in the later work of Edmund Husserl, especially the Cartesian Meditations and the Crisis, and in the strictly phenomenological work of Michel Henry, especially Material Phenomenology; (2) to highlight Henry’s radical critique of Husserlian intersubjectivity and show that such critique, while valuable in its intention, is ultimately misguided because it neglects the important contribution Husserl’s complicated vocabulary of lifeworld makes to the study of intersubjectivity; and (3) to point toward a phenomenological conception of intersubjective practice we may call the realm of we-synthesis that prioritizes the first-person perspective rooted in empathy, which enables meaningful engagement with the second-person perspective. Working in conjunction with Husserl and Henry on the phenomenological conception of shared life enables the recuperation of the fragile line between subjectivity and intersubjectivity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document